Howard County, Maryland
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Howard County Biological Monitoring and Assessment Upper Brighton Dam, Cattail Creek, and Lower Brighton Dam Watersheds- 2017 FINAL Howard County, Maryland KCI Technologies, Inc. November 2017 - Final Howard County Biological Monitoring and Assessment Upper Brighton Dan, Cattail Creek, and Lower Brighton Dam Watersheds – 2017 November 2017 - Final NPDES Permit No. 00-DP-3318 MD0068322 Prepared for: Department of Public Works Bureau of Environmental Services Stormwater Management Division NPDES Watershed Management Programs Prepared by: KCI Technologies, Inc. 936 Ridgebrook Road Sparks, Maryland 21152 KCI Job Order No. 16158563.28 CONTENTS Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ iii 1 Background and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 1 2 Methodologies ............................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Selection of Sampling Sites ................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Impervious Surface and Land Use Analysis ......................................................................... 5 2.3 Water Quality Sampling ........................................................................................................ 5 2.4 Biological Sampling .............................................................................................................. 6 2.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling ............................................................................... 7 2.4.2 Sample Processing and Laboratory Identification ............................................................ 7 2.4.3 Biological Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 8 2.5 Physical Habitat Assessment ................................................................................................. 9 2.6 Geomorphic Analysis .......................................................................................................... 10 2.6.1 Cross Section Analysis ................................................................................................... 10 2.6.2 Particle Size Analysis ..................................................................................................... 11 2.6.3 Rosgen Classification ...................................................................................................... 11 3 Results....................................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Subwatershed Summaries.................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Upper Brighton Dam ....................................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Cattail Creek ................................................................................................................... 18 3.1.3 Lower Brighton Dam ...................................................................................................... 24 4 Discussion and Comparison...................................................................................................... 30 4.1 Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 30 4.1.1 2017 Assessment Results ................................................................................................ 30 4.1.2 Comparison of 2001, 2005, 2012, and 2017 Bioassessment data ................................... 34 5 Conclusion and Recommendations ........................................................................................... 39 5.1 Recommendations for Future Program Development ......................................................... 39 6 References ................................................................................................................................. 41 i FIGURES Figure 1 - Howard County Bioassessment ............................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 - Location Map of Cattail Creek, Upper Brighton Dam, and Lower Brighton Dam Watersheds ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3 – Cattail Creek, Upper Brighton Dam, and Lower Brighton Dam Bioassessment Sampling Locations .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 4 – Upper Brighton Dam PSU Sampling Results ....................................................................... 15 Figure 5 – Cattail Creek PSU Sampling Results .................................................................................... 22 Figure 6 – Lower Brighton Dam PSU Sampling Results ...................................................................... 28 Figure 7 - Relationship between the Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (BIBI) and impervious surface in PSUs sampled during 2017 Howard County Biological Monitoring ............................................. 31 Figure 8 - Relationship between the Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (BIBI) and specific conductivity in PSUs sampled during 2017 Howard County Biological Monitoring ......................................... 32 Figure 9 - Relationship between the Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (BIBI) and physical habitat in PSUs sampled during 2017 Howard County Biological Monitoring ............................................. 33 Figure 10 - Comparison of 2001, 2005, 2012, and 2017 BIBI scores. .................................................. 35 Figure 11 - Comparison of 2001, 2005, 2012 and 2017 RBP Physical Habitat Assessment scores. ..... 38 TABLES Table 1 – Summary of Bioassessment Progress ...................................................................................... 2 Table 2 - Water Quality Sampling and COMAR Standards, Use III-P and IV-P Waters........................ 6 Table 3 – Biological Index Scoring for Piedmont Benthic Macroinvertebrates ...................................... 9 Table 4 – BIBI Scoring and Rating .......................................................................................................... 9 Table 5 – RBP Habitat Parameters - High Gradient Streams ................................................................ 10 Table 6 – RBP Habitat Score and Ratings ............................................................................................. 10 Table 7 – Rosgen Level II Channel Type Description ........................................................................... 12 Table 8 – Upper Brighton Summary ...................................................................................................... 17 Table 9 – Cattail Creek Summary .......................................................................................................... 23 Table 10 – Lower Brighton Summary ................................................................................................... 29 Table 11 - Pearson Correlations ............................................................................................................. 34 Table 12 - Comparison of 2001, 2005, 2012, and 2017 BIBI Data ....................................................... 34 Table 13. Tukey (HSD) / Analysis of the differences between years with a confidence interval of 95% ....................................................................................................................................................... 36 Table 14 - Comparison of 2001, 2005, 2012, and 2017 RBP Physical Habitat Assessment Data......... 37 APPENDICES Appendix A: Land Use and Imperviousness Appendix B: Water Quality Data Appendix C: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Appendix D: Habitat Assessment Data Appendix E: Geomorphologic Data Appendix F: Quality Assurance/Quality Control ii Acknowledgements The principal authors for this report are Susanna Brellis and Colin Hill of KCI Technologies. Fieldwork was conducted primarily by Susanna Brellis, Katie Myers, and Laura Kelm of KCI and Shaun Evans of Straughan Environmental Services. Sample processing and taxonomic identification was conducted by Aquatic Resources Center (ARC). ARC’s lab manager is Todd Askegaard. Tom McKay of KCI provided additional support with GIS analysis. Shaun Evans assisted with report editing and review. Michael Pieper assisted with contract management oversight. For more information on this report or Howard County’s Watershed Management efforts contact: Mark Richmond, Chief, Stormwater Management Division Stormwater Management Division Bureau of Environmental Services Howard County Department of Public Works 6751 Columbia Gateway Drive Columbia, Maryland 21046 410-313-6416 Or visit us on the web at https://www.howardcountymd.gov/Departments/Public-Works/Bureau-Of- Environmental-Services/Stormwater-Management/Watershed-Management/Watershed-Surveys The appropriate citation for this report is: S. K. Brellis and C. R. Hill. 2017. Howard County Biological Monitoring and Assessment, Upper Brighton Dam, Cattail Creek, Lower Brighton Dam Watersheds – 2017. Prepared by KCI Technologies, Inc., Sparks, MD for Howard County,